In the latest move to oust Shelby County District Attorney Steve Mulroy, state Sen. Brent Taylor, R-Memphis, has established a hotline for Memphians to call and share their experiences dealing with the local prosecutor. According to Local Memphis, Taylor said that if any of the information received is relevant, it “will be shared with the legal counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee for inclusion in the ouster resolution.” Earlier this month, Taylor said he plans to file a resolution immediately following the November election that would require Mulroy’s removal.

The plaintiff filed a health care liability action without a certificate of good faith. When the defendant moved to dismiss, the plaintiff asserted that the certificate was unnecessary because the common knowledge exception applied. He also contended that his noncompliance should be excused based on the defendant’s failure to timely provide medical records and/or for extraordinary cause. The trial court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments and dismissed the action with prejudice. We affirm.

In this parental termination case, the paternal grandparents filed a petition to terminate the mother’s parental rights to her four children, alleging several grounds for termination. The trial court found that one ground for termination had been proven and that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests. Based on these findings, the court terminated the mother’s parental rights. The mother appeals. We affirm the trial court’s finding that the termination ground of abandonment by wanton disregard pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 36-1-102(1)(A)(iv)(c) has been proven and that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests. Accordingly, we affirm the termination of the mother’s parental rights.

The trial court entered a permanent parenting plan in 2014 that governed the parties’ custody arrangement for nine years. In 2022, the child’s father petitioned the juvenile court for a modification of the parenting plan. During the pendency of the modification petition, he also filed a motion for a restraining order to prevent the child’s mother from removing the parties’ daughter from his custody, which was granted. After a hearing on the modification petition, the court found a material change in circumstances had occurred warranting modification and that modification of the custody arrangement was in the child’s best interest. We affirm.

This appeal concerns a dispute over insurance coverage. After a fire loss, the insured brought a breach of contract claim against her insurer. The insurer subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court awarded summary judgment to the insurer, finding that the insured was not entitled to coverage for additional living expenses because she did not have an insurable interest in the property and that the insured’s contents coverage claim was precluded under the doctrine of judicial estoppel. The insured appeals. We reverse and remand.

The prisoner in this case filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis long after expiration of the one-year limitations period and sought tolling of the statute of limitations. The petition was filed under the tolling exception to the coram nobis statute of limitations adopted by this Court in Workman v. State, 41 S.W.3d 100 (Tenn. 2001). The coram nobis court held a hearing on whether to toll the statute of limitations. It accepted the factual allegations in the coram nobis petition as true, but determined that the new evidence did not show that the petitioner was actually innocent of the crimes of which he was convicted, so he was not entitled to tolling of the statute of limitations. Consequently, the coram nobis court dismissed the petition as untimely. The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the coram nobis court on the tolling exception, reversed the dismissal for untimeliness, and remanded for a hearing on the allegations in the petition. On appeal, we hold that if a petition for a writ of error coram nobis is not timely filed and seeks tolling of the statute of limitations, it must be based on new evidence, discovered after expiration of the limitations period, that clearly and convincingly shows that the petitioner is actually innocent of the underlying crime, i.e., that the petitioner did not commit the crime. To obtain tolling of the coram nobis statute of limitations, the prisoner must file the petition no more than one year after he discovers the new evidence of actual innocence. From our review of the record, we agree with the analysis and conclusion of the coram nobis court and find no error. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals and affirm the decision of the coram nobis court dismissing the petition as untimely.

The American Bar Association (ABA) Task Force on Law and Artificial Intelligence (AI) has released the results of its AI and Legal Education Survey, a compilation of insights gathered from law school administrators and faculty regarding the integration of artificial intelligence into legal education. “The survey suggests that AI is already having a significant impact on legal education and is likely to result in additional changes in the years ahead. With a majority of responding law schools offering dedicated AI courses and providing opportunities for students to engage with AI tools, it is evident that legal education is evolving to meet the demands of a profession increasingly shaped by technological advancements,” the authors write. Read the full report.

The Tennessee Alliance for Legal Services (TALS) is accepting nominations for its three annual Access to Justice Awards: Janice M. Holder Award, B. Riney Green Award and New Advocate of the Year Award. Nominations and any supporting documents must be submitted by July 10. The awards will be presented at the Equal Justice University (EJU) Conference. Learn more about the awards process. EJU 2024 will take place Aug. 28-30 at the Embassy Suites in Murfreesboro. Learn more about the conference or start the registration process.

State Rep. Aftyn Behn, D-Nashville, and attorney Rachel Welty have filed suit against Middle Tennessee district attorneys general to stop enforcement of a new state law that makes it illegal for adults to help minors obtain an abortion out of state without parental consent. The law was signed by Gov. Bill Lee in May and goes into effect July 1. According to the Nashville Post, the pair argue that the law infringes on the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment right to free speech. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. District attorneys named include Glenn Funk, Bryant C. Dunaway, Jason Lawson, Jennings H. Jones, Robert J. Carter, Ray Whitley, Robert J. Nash, Stacey Edmonson, Brent Cooper, Ray Crouch and Hans Schwendimann.

Bowlman "Bo" Tarleton Bowles Jr. died June 9 at age 86. He attended the Virginia Military Institute and accepted a commission in the Army as an infantry officer after graduation. Bowles went on to graduate from Vanderbilt University Law School, joining the law firm of Mays & Valentine where he practiced for 15 years. In 1980, he formed his own practice, which he developed with his son, Churchill, into Bowles Affiliates. Bowles served as chair of the American Bar Association Committee on Income Taxation of Trusts and Estates, and was a member of the American College of Trust and Estate Counsel, as well as the Virginia and Tennessee bar associations. Burial services at Hollywood Cemetery will be private with a celebration of life reception to be held at a future date. Memorial donations may be made to the VMI Foundation Inc., P.O. Box 932, Lexington, VA 24450.